On 11/03/2013 08:23 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Michael Scherer wrote:
However, since you didn't explained at all what are the issues you are
facing with the new approach, and since you have only explained how you
are doing on your 20 servers ( which is totally unrelated to the
question of
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Przemek Klosowski
przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote:
We don't have a way of telling which updates REQUIRE reboot(*)--but solving
this problem by rebooting always is not right, in my opinion.
This information is already available in bodhi. It's probably not
very
Am 06.11.2013 23:03, schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Przemek Klosowski
przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote:
We don't have a way of telling which updates REQUIRE reboot(*)--but solving
this problem by rebooting always is not right, in my opinion.
This information is
On 11/06/2013 05:08 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.11.2013 23:03, schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Przemek Klosowski
przemek.klosow...@nist.gov wrote:
We don't have a way of telling which updates REQUIRE reboot(*)--but solving
this problem by rebooting always is not
Hi,
On Sun, 03 Nov 2013 14:23:28 +0100
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Michael Scherer wrote:
When statistics cost you money, yeah, I think that's important to
take them in account. Maybe your employer do not care about this,
but I strongly suspect mine does, and I strongly
- Original Message -
On 1 November 2013 19:27, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
Cleaned up the appdata xml
Thanks,
https://github.com/timlau/yumex/blob/master/misc/yumex.appdata.xml
but I get errors from appdata-validate
Can see what the problem is :(
You've
Le Sam 2 novembre 2013 21:02, Richard Hughes a écrit :
It's also impossible to do in a
race-free way on a multiuser system. Quite frankly, I'm surprised
online updates works as much as it does.
It works as much as it does because people have made it work for years
instead of giving up like
On 11/02/2013 09:27 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
instead going the easy windows-way and say ok, you have to reboot
I don't think this is a technically accurate characterization of the
Windows update mechanism. Windows even allows updating processes
through in-memory patching and compiles most
Am 04.11.2013 12:49, schrieb Florian Weimer:
On 11/02/2013 09:27 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
instead going the easy windows-way and say ok, you have to reboot
I don't think this is a technically accurate characterization of the Windows
update mechanism. Windows even allows
updating
Le lundi 04 novembre 2013 à 12:04 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit :
instead going the easy windows-way and say ok, you have to reboot
it would be more worth to optimize the handling *after* updates
without reboot and let the user decie wichi services are needed
to restart
Not to mention
On 4 November 2013 10:24, Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
If you're not using libxml2, you should be.
I'm using GMarkup.
Richard.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 November 2013 17:47, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I'm not really excited about a lot of required rebooting, though -- I think
that might be worse than the disease. We should have most of the
On 4 November 2013 14:31, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
That's true in the _general_ case, and therefore the ability to have
off-line updates is a good _general_ default. We should be able to do
_much_ better for many common cases (at the very least, a package that
only has one
On Mon, 2013-11-04 at 14:48 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
I like what ChromeOS
does where it has a rescue-ish partition, to do the upgrade, but
without something like btrfs that can switch roots on a running
filesystem that's basically impossible on Linux.
This is precisely what
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 November 2013 14:31, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
That's true in the _general_ case, and therefore the ability to have
off-line updates is a good _general_ default. We should be able to do
_much_ better for
Michael Scherer wrote:
As i say, we mostly have a fleet of laptop, and of course, the situation
would be different if this was a set of workstation, but alas, this is
not the case.
It's true that the problem is harder for laptops, which are often more
loosely administrated by necessity.
Michael Scherer wrote:
When statistics cost you money, yeah, I think that's important to take
them in account. Maybe your employer do not care about this, but I
strongly suspect mine does, and I strongly suspect that most companies
do care about this as well.
Company computers should get
Reindl Harald wrote:
i am using updates-testing over years and often enough koji-packages too
there are not much barely and problemtaic tested updates at all
if someone wnats a system with less to zero updates he is using the
wrong distribution and better suited with RHEL
+1, the frequent
On 3 November 2013 13:31, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Fewer updates mean fewer bugfixes and thus more bugs!
I'd agree with you if the majority of updates weren't either packaging
tweaks or new upstream versions with little-to-no useful update text.
Richard.
--
devel mailing list
Richard Hughes wrote:
I'd agree with you if the majority of updates weren't either packaging
tweaks or new upstream versions with little-to-no useful update text.
Packaging tweak updates are not that common. And the fact that the update
notes are useless doesn't necessarily mean the update is
Le dimanche 03 novembre 2013 à 14:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
Michael Scherer wrote:
When statistics cost you money, yeah, I think that's important to take
them in account. Maybe your employer do not care about this, but I
strongly suspect mine does, and I strongly suspect that most
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Ray Strode halfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Small errors here:
liControl want package repositories there is enabled for current
session/li
maybe should be:
liControl what package repositories are enabled for the current
session/li
Thanks, fixed upstream
Richard Hughes wrote:
Not update, we do all updates offline now.
Ewww! Yuck!
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:35:18PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
right-click-update in the app menu list, and other fun stuff like that?
Not update, we do all updates offline now.
Richard, who is we in this context? And what is offline?
--
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 12:05 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
Richard, who is we in this context? And what is offline?
we = GNOME, via systemd
offline = Install Updates Restart [1]. Your computer shuts down,
installs updates, shuts down again, and then boots back to GDM. This has
been around since
Am 02.11.2013 18:16, schrieb Michael Catanzaro:
The other change I want is for PackageKit to download updates weekly by
default. Currently updates come daily, but daily offline updates would
be completely absurd. All we have to do to support this is to change the
default value of one
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 18:22 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 02.11.2013 18:16, schrieb Michael Catanzaro:
The other change I want is for PackageKit to download updates weekly by
default. Currently updates come daily, but daily offline updates would
be completely absurd. All we have to do to
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 18:33 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 11:01 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
Sure. GNOME is a complete desktop, not a collection of packages
designed to be replaced.
Personally, I see little benefit in prohibiting users from removing core
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 01:34:40PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
The logic I recently implemented for gnome-software 3.12 in F21 is to
check for new updates once per day, and download updates when they are
important (e.g. security updates), or when it has been a week since the
last time we
Hi
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote:
Richard Hughes wrote:
Not update, we do all updates offline now.
Ewww! Yuck!
Can you stop with these childish responses? As a KDE contributor, it is
understandable if you don't agree with GNOME decisions but
On 2 November 2013 17:47, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I'm not really excited about a lot of required rebooting, though -- I think
that might be worse than the disease. We should have most of the information
needed to determine if a reboot is really necessary, shouldn't we? I
Am 02.11.2013 21:02, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 2 November 2013 17:47, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I'm not really excited about a lot of required rebooting, though -- I think
that might be worse than the disease. We should have most of the information
needed to determine
On 2 November 2013 20:27, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
lsof | grep DEL | grep /usr shows any opened but deleted file
which is the case after updfates while applications are running
Doesn't work with libreoffice, firefox or any application that loads
plugins or modules.
hence
Am 02.11.2013 21:35, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 2 November 2013 20:27, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
lsof | grep DEL | grep /usr shows any opened but deleted file
which is the case after updfates while applications are running
Doesn't work with libreoffice, firefox or any
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 20:35 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
Doesn't work with libreoffice, firefox or any application that loads
plugins or modules.
I thought applications shipping desktop files would be updated online,
and other packages would trigger offline updates. Has this plan changed?
On 2 November 2013 21:08, Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
I thought applications shipping desktop files would be updated online,
and other packages would trigger offline updates. Has this plan changed?
Yes, everything requires an offline update now.
Richard.
--
devel mailing
Am 02.11.2013 22:13, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 2 November 2013 21:08, Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
I thought applications shipping desktop files would be updated online,
and other packages would trigger offline updates. Has this plan changed?
Yes, everything requires an
Le samedi 02 novembre 2013 à 21:40 +0100, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 02.11.2013 21:35, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 2 November 2013 20:27, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
lsof | grep DEL | grep /usr shows any opened but deleted file
which is the case after updfates while
Am 02.11.2013 22:29, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Ars technica summarize quite clearly the situation on this problem :
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/its-the-little-things-how-small-conundrums-make-many-hate-computers/
And I do not even speak of the users who reboot
Dne 2.11.2013 22:13, Richard Hughes napsal(a):
On 2 November 2013 21:08, Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
I thought applications shipping desktop files would be updated online,
and other packages would trigger offline updates. Has this plan changed?
Yes, everything requires an
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 08:02:51PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
update fails, you either get corrupted data and crashing application,
or a hosed rpmdb. In a related point, we need to reduce the number of
updates we present to the user in a massive way in a supposedly
stable distro.
I think we
Le samedi 02 novembre 2013 à 22:35 +0100, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 02.11.2013 22:29, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Ars technica summarize quite clearly the situation on this problem :
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 17:46 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
So, really, it's this related point that I'm concerned about now. We _need_
to do these things in coordination, not just push a situation into F20 where
we are telling our users to reboot everyday -- that's a pretty bad user
experience.
Am 02.11.2013 23:21, schrieb Matthias Clasen:
Then change the way that updates to the released distribution are
treated. As long as we don't constrain the constant stream of barely
tested updates, we *are* pretty much forcing our users to restart their
system frequently.
i am using
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 06:21:34PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, really, it's this related point that I'm concerned about now. We _need_
to do these things in coordination, not just push a situation into F20 where
we are telling our users to reboot everyday -- that's a pretty bad user
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 18:38 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 06:21:34PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, really, it's this related point that I'm concerned about now. We
_need_
to do these things in coordination, not just push a situation into F20
where
we
On Oct 31, 2013 11:43 PM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com
wrote:
It isn't a *package* management application. It's an *application*
management application, ie., it only handles packages that are desktop
On 11/01/2013 04:58 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 04:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Having as the only GUI package management application on your spin one
that
does not even offer all packages is very broken.
It isn't a *package* management application. It's an *application*
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 08:03 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Why would this be useful? Just to be fashionable?
No. If you haven't been following the design of gnome-software, the
intent is to make it easier for users to install applications that they
want, without having to dig up what package name
On 1 November 2013 06:51, Pete Travis li...@petetravis.com wrote:
Hmm... It sounds like yumex would be much more discoverable if it included
an appdata file :)
Agreed. At the moment applications without an AppData file are shown
below applications with AppData in the search results. See
On 1 November 2013 03:19, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Having as the only GUI package management application on your spin one that
does not even offer all packages is very broken.
You forgot to type in my opinion...
We have a notion of 'core app' - for things that 'come with the
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, given that you can easily install the old packagekit
package tools using the application installer, there's really no
reason to get upset at all.
Yet people visibly _are_ upset in this thread, so there's something
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
Packages are not interesting to desktop users, they
are just an implementation detail of how to get something done. e.g.
Play my media file, Open this document someone sent to me. Anyone
wanting to do things like
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, given that you can easily install the old packagekit
package tools using the application installer, there's really no
reason to get upset at all.
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
Packages are not interesting to desktop users, they
are just an implementation detail of how to get something done. e.g.
Play my media file,
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:14 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz wrote:
We can't make everybody happy all the time, sure, but there must be
something that can be done.
* Add a release note describing how to get a GUI that shows all
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 11:01:57AM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
We wanted to write an application that rocked for a certain set of
users, rather than write a generic UI that wasn't really usable by
anyone. Also, given that you can easily install the old packagekit
package tools using the
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Pete Travis li...@petetravis.com wrote:
Hmm... It sounds like yumex would be much more discoverable if it included
an appdata file :)
Done,
https://github.com/timlau/yumex/blob/82198add9daabcfcabe9d8bb7a28ef3190e920d7/misc/yumex-appdata.xml
Tim
--
devel
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 09:58:19AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
Speaking purely for myself and my own usage, I think this distinction makes
plenty of sense. Except I don't even really want the old packagekit tools.
If I'm looking for something desktop-application-y, an app store seems
like a
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 10:05 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 09:58:19AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
Speaking purely for myself and my own usage, I think this distinction makes
plenty of sense. Except I don't even really want the old packagekit tools.
If I'm looking for
On 1 November 2013 14:00, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
https://github.com/timlau/yumex/blob/82198add9daabcfcabe9d8bb7a28ef3190e920d7/misc/yumex-appdata.xml
There are numerous problems with that file, and it's not going to be
used by the parser. If you read
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 15:00 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Pete Travis li...@petetravis.com
wrote:
Hmm... It sounds like yumex would be much more discoverable if
it included an appdata file :)
Done,
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 10:07:11AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
Adding this as a gnome shell search provider will make this *really* slick.
I see that's https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707594, but I don't
see it on my F20 test box. Is this going to be in gnome 3.10 or is it for
On 1 November 2013 14:53, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Okay, thanks. This is really cool good stuff. Guess it's time to update my
other laptop to Rawhide. :)
For those less brave, I've uploaded a screenshot here:
Richard Hughes (hughsi...@gmail.com) said:
On 1 November 2013 14:53, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Okay, thanks. This is really cool good stuff. Guess it's time to update my
other laptop to Rawhide. :)
For those less brave, I've uploaded a screenshot here:
On Fri 01 Nov 2013 11:31:37 EDT, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Richard Hughes (hughsi...@gmail.com) said:
On 1 November 2013 14:53, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Okay, thanks. This is really cool good stuff. Guess it's time to update my
other laptop to Rawhide. :)
For those less
On 1 November 2013 15:31, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote:
So if it has a session service, and a shell provider integration, does that
mean we do overlays/highlighting on applications with updates pending in the
shell
We don't do that at the moment, but we could add that as a feature
On 1 November 2013 15:36, Ryan Lerch rle...@redhat.com wrote:
Or even kick off a removal of an application from the overview?
Sure, that's certainly possible, I'd just need some UI mockups to work
from. Note, core apps are not removable, so we'd have to have some
kind of API to ask if an app is
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:29:02PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
For those less brave, I've uploaded a screenshot here:
http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/gnome-software-shell-search.png
H -- that little shopping bag doesn't _quite_ say available but not
installed to me. I wonder
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote:
Great, thanks for doing that.
Noticed while quickly looking over the file:
- it is not valid xml: needs to be escaped as amp;
- 'gui' is not a great term to use. I'd suggest rewording the first
sentence maybe as
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com wrote:
Great, thanks for doing that.
Noticed while quickly looking over the file:
- it is not valid xml: needs to be escaped as amp;
- 'gui' is
On 1 November 2013 19:27, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
Cleaned up the appdata xml
Thanks,
https://github.com/timlau/yumex/blob/master/misc/yumex.appdata.xml
but I get errors from appdata-validate
Can see what the problem is :(
You've got some odd non-utf8 char as the very
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 8:30 PM, drago01 drag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com
wrote:
Great, thanks for doing that.
Noticed while quickly looking over
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
You've got some odd non-utf8 char as the very first byte in the file:
Looks like the editor has written an Unicode BOM, after removing that it
validates ok
Tim
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Tim Lauridsen tim.laurid...@gmail.com wrote:
Cleaned up the appdata xml
https://github.com/timlau/yumex/blob/master/misc/yumex.appdata.xml
Small errors here:
liControl want package repositories there is enabled for current
session/li
maybe should be:
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 11:01 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
Sure. GNOME is a complete desktop, not a collection of packages
designed to be replaced.
Personally, I see little benefit in prohibiting users from removing core
apps. If they don't like a particular program, why force it on them?
Many
On 02.11.2013 00:33, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 11:01 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
Sure. GNOME is a complete desktop, not a collection of packages
designed to be replaced.
Personally, I see little benefit in prohibiting users from removing core
apps. If they don't like a
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 12:13 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
I have tested gnome-software to see the current state, compaired to
gpk in F19, there is a lot stuff there cant be done.
1. You cant install backgrounds / icons
It is an application installer, first and foremost. Installing
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.comwrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 12:13 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
I have tested gnome-software to see the current state, compaired to
gpk in F19, there is a lot stuff there cant be done.
1. You cant install backgrounds /
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 14:31 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 12:13 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
I have tested gnome-software to see the current state,
compaired to
Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 14:31 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
Look at System - File Tools - Caja-actions configuration tool
Get the cinnamon guys to fork the nautilus appdata ? I'm sure it will
only need minor adjustments... :-)
Caja is actually from MATE, Cinnamon has
Matthias Clasen wrote:
It is an application installer, first and foremost. Installing
backgrounds/icons/themes is not a priority.
Having as the only GUI package management application on your spin one that
does not even offer all packages is very broken.
We have a notion of 'core app' - for
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 14:31 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
I know Richard has pushed hard to get appdata for apps, but it do help
the
end user, if lot of apps in gnome-software dont have any descriptions.
Look at System - File Tools - Caja-actions configuration tool
How should an end
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 04:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Having as the only GUI package management application on your spin one
that
does not even offer all packages is very broken.
It isn't a *package* management application. It's an *application*
management application, ie., it only handles
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
It isn't a *package* management application. It's an *application*
management application, ie., it only handles packages that are desktop
applications (and therefore have desktop files associated with them).
I'm
85 matches
Mail list logo
